Thoughts on the Fourth of July
by Dr. William L. Pierce
TWO WEEKS AGO we celebrated the Fourth of July, America’s biggest patriotic holiday. It’s a time when we celebrate our strength, brag about our accomplishments, remember our victories, and so on. It got me to thinking about the Second World War, and I’ll share some of my thoughts on the war with you.
In that regard, the British, our allies in that war, also have been in my thoughts recently. What made me think about the British in relation to our Fourth of July celebration is the fact that just two weeks earlier the British Parliament passed a law lowering the age of consent for homosexual activity to 16. This new law, which was approved by Parliament on June 20, was campaigned for heavily by the so-called “chicken hawk” lobby. “Chicken hawks” are adult male homosexuals who prey on young boys. They pick up boys on streetcorners, ply them with drugs or drink, give them money, and sodomize them. It used to be that they could be arrested and prosecuted for such activity. Now they can’t. Now it’s legal, as long as the boys are 16 years old. The “chicken hawks,” a number of whom actually hold seats in Parliament, already are clamoring for the legal age to be lowered to 14. With Bill Clinton’s good friend Tony Blair as prime minister now, the “chicken hawks” probably will get what they want.
Now how is that relevant to the Second World War? I’ll tell you. Hitler and his wicked Germans, you see, didn’t approve of homosexual activity. After Hitler became chancellor of Germany in 1933, a homosexual who sodomized a 16-year-old boy in Germany and got caught was in big trouble, and I mean big trouble. A lot of homosexuals wound up in concentration camps, and not all of them came out again. Even today they still whine about how Hitler made them wear pink triangles on their clothes and persecuted them. But fortunately for the “chicken hawks,” Britain and America went to war against Germany, and now homosexuals everywhere have full rights. More rights, in fact, than the rest of us. If we hadn’t fought for the rights of homosexuals in the Second World War, then “chicken hawks” wouldn’t have the right to sodomize young boys today: certainly not in Germany, and probably not in Britain or the United States either. Winning the war against Germany set ideological fashions for the whole world.
Of course, it wasn’t just the rights of homosexuals we fought for in the Second World War. In fact, that part of it was kept pretty quiet back in those days. What we were told publicly was a whole rah-rah chorus of Fourth of July things: we fought for equality, against book-burning, for free speech and freedom of the press, for the rights of women and children, et cetera. Many of these excuses for going to war against Germany were based on falsehoods — or at least on misrepresentations. Book burning, for example: every American has been shown pictures of Germans throwing books on bonfires, and the story was that Germans could read only books approved by the government. Americans were made to believe that the books being burned were confiscated from the homes of Germans who had been packed off to concentration camps for having them and that it was illegal to own such books in Germany.
Actually, the bonfires were symbolic; they were intended to express public disapproval of certain types of books: pornography, communist and Jewish propaganda, and the like. Before Hitler became chancellor, the communists were very powerful in Germany, the Jews owned many publishing houses, and pornography flourished. Hitler’s government wanted to set an example for the public; it wanted to show its attitude toward socially harmful and trashy books. And so public bonfires were staged, and a lot of pornography — along with a lot of Marx and Freud — was burned to let the public understand that the literary tastes of the government had changed sharply when Hitler became chancellor. It was not illegal to own books of the sort burned in the bonfires, but everyone understood that they were considered degenerate or socially harmful. It wasn’t until after the war that laws were passed banning Politically Incorrect literature altogether. For example, today, in democratic Germany, it is illegal for anyone to attempt to publish or distribute any of the books I have written, and so we must make German editions of these books available through the Internet, where Germans who are brave enough to do so can download them, print copies, and secretly distribute them to their friends. Virtually every other book which the Jews consider offensive or dangerous to their interests is also banned. It is even forbidden to utter certain words or express certain ideas orally in public. There are literally hundreds of political prisoners sitting in German prisons today who wrote, or said, or otherwise gave expression to prohibited ideas. That didn’t happen under Hitler. It couldn’t happen until after we had beaten the Germans in the Second World War. And by the way, don’t hold your breath waiting for Mr. Clinton to express the sort of concern for these current German political prisoners that he expressed recently for Chinese political prisoners. It won’t happen.
Or take the rights of women and children. Much of the war propaganda produced by Roosevelt’s heavily Jewish Office of War Information — the OWI — during the Second World War was designed to make Americans feel morally superior to Germans and to feel justified in waging genocidal war against them. I remember one very effective propaganda poster produced by the OWI. It showed pretty, semi-nude girls with German officers in a brothel. The legend on the poster was “Deliver us from evil.” The idea it was promoting was that the Germans forced young women in the countries occupied by their army to work as sex slaves in military brothels.
This propaganda was totally false. Although the Japanese engaged in such behavior, the Germans never did. The Germans’ behavior toward conquered peoples, insofar as looting and rape were concerned, was more civilized than that of any other participants in the war, including the Americans. The people with the worst record in this regard, of course, were our gallant Soviet allies, who were deliberately encouraged to rape and murder civilians by their Jewish commissar of war propaganda, Ilya Ehrenburg. I quoted some of Ehrenburg’s murderous exhortations to the Red Army in my program on the sinking of the Wilhelm Gustloff earlier this year.
One picture from this period which is burned into my mind is a photograph of a teen-aged German girl, about 15 years old, in a Berlin train station shortly after the occupation of the German capital by victorious Allied forces. The blonde girl has just been gang-raped, the legend under the photograph tells us, and she is in a state of shock, with tears streaming down her face. The photograph was published in Life magazine in September 1945. I have kept a vivid memory of it for more than 50 years. The media in this country usually covered up such atrocities. All most Americans ever heard about from the media were the supposed atrocities committed against the Jews by the Germans. This photograph is, so far as I know, the only one of a German victim which was given wide circulation, despite the hundreds of thousands of German women raped by the forces of democracy at the end of the war. My reaction to that photograph — and I first saw it at a time when I believed the propaganda story that the Germans had killed millions of innocent Jews in gas chambers during the war — my reaction was that if this one girl could have been spared her ordeal it would have been worth another six million Jews going to the gas chambers.
But, unfortunately, that’s not the way it worked out. And today, as a direct consequence of our waging war against Germany, hundreds of thousands of other European women have been forced into sex slavery by White-slave racketeers headquartered in Israel. In fact, it is safe to say that if America had not gone to war against Germany, there would be no international trade in White slaves today. If the German view of things had prevailed, instead of the Jewish view — backed by Anglo-American and Soviet military force — there would be no Jewish organized crime gangs operating in Europe today, no White women being forced into prostitution by these Jewish gangs, and no state of Israel to provide an international headquarters for the White-slave trade. Hitler’s Germany would not have tolerated White slavery in Europe, and his example and moral backing almost certainly would have allowed the opponents of White slavery in the United States and elsewhere to prevail over the Jews. At the very least, the Jews could not have kept a White-slave operation secret, because the Germans certainly would have kept the whole world alerted. As it is now, any German who dares to speak of the Jewish control of the White-slave trade will be imprisoned under democratic Germany’s “hate speech” laws, and we have to depend on occasional slips of the tongue by the Jews themselves, such as the article on White slavery which appeared in the New York Times in January of this year, and which I already have cited in several of my broadcasts.
You know, all of this is really peripheral to the principal ideological justification for the Second World War, and that was egalitarianism. One theme which the Jewish propagandists in the OWI worked into their propaganda more than any other was the idea that the Germans considered themselves “supermen,” superior in every way to non-Germans, and so it was our duty to disabuse them of this illusion. Well, of course, the Germans were pretty proud of themselves, even if they didn’t really believe that they were “supermen,” as the Jews claimed they did. And they certainly weren’t egalitarians. They believed, for example, that White people, that Europeans, were superior in intelligence and creativity and the other skills of civilization to Black Africans. Well, virtually all White Americans believed exactly the same thing in those days, so the OWI distorted and misrepresented the German belief so that White Americans wouldn’t recognize it as the same as their own belief. The Germans were portrayed as very arrogant, very intolerant, and very brutal: as people who believed they were “supermen” and were entitled to plunder and abuse all the rest of us.
One of the best-known examples of the way in which the Jewish propagandists successfully misrepresented the Germans in this regard was connected with the interaction between Adolf Hitler and the Black athlete Jesse Owens at the 1936 Olympic Games in Berlin. Owens, of course, won three gold medals in sprinting and jumping, and the propagandists gleefully trumpeted that he had humiliated the German “supermen” and had — quote — “smashed the myth of Aryan superiority.” — end of quote — They also concocted the story that Hitler, angered by the Black’s athletic victories, had “snubbed” him and refused to shake his hand in a show of bad sportsmanship. The Jewish media spread this story so successfully that it is still repeated today, despite the fact that it is completely false. The Germans, of course, were not humiliated at all in the 1936 Olympics. In fact the Germans were the clear winners, with more gold medals than anyone else. More silver and bronze medals than anyone else too. Hitler’s Germany won a total of 89 gold, silver, and bronze medals, compared to 56 for Roosevelt’s United States. The games were an enormous triumph for the Germans rather than a humiliation. And Hitler didn’t “snub” Jesse Owens. In fact, Hitler stood and waved at Owens when the Black athlete passed the reviewing stand. Owens always felt that he had been treated royally by the Germans and couldn’t understand how the stories about a “snub” got started. Well, we understand, don’t we?
Anyway, the Germans were portrayed by Jewish propagandists as a bunch of arrogant, heel-clicking, monocle-wearing egomaniacs who believed that they were “supermen” and that everyone else was a “subhuman.” It was up to the democratic and egalitarian Americans to whip them and teach them the error of their ways. That was the theme of a thousand Hollywood propaganda films. Well, we did whip them. We bombed their cities into ruins, we slaughtered German men, women, and children by the millions, and then after we had beaten them we killed another million or so of them and hanged their leaders. We taught them a real lesson in democracy and egalitarianism.
And today we are reaping the benefits of that great victory of ours. We are getting a real lesson in democracy and egalitarianism ourselves. Democracy gave us Bill Clinton as our President. Egalitarianism gave us the racial mess we have in our schools and our cities. Democracy and egalitarianism will make us a minority in our own country within the next few decades. That’s what Bill Clinton was gloating about when he made that amazing speech at Portland State University last month. Whites will become a minority in America, he said, and it will be a good thing. It would be “un-American” of us to oppose it, he said. And you know, if Americanism is defined in terms of the things we fought for in the Second World War, then Mr. Clinton is absolutely right. If we really believe in egalitarianism, if we really believe that we’re just the same as Haitians and Vietnamese and Mexican mestizos, then it won’t make any difference when we become a minority, will it?
And more than anything else this will have been a direct consequence of the Second World War: a direct consequence of our fighting on the Jewish side in that war. Before the war we had a reasonably sensible immigration policy in America. It was very hard for anyone but a European immigrant to get in. But after we had fought a war in support of equality, how could we justify letting Europeans in and keeping Asians and Mexicans and Haitians out? Anyway, we let ourselves be talked into scrapping our racially exclusionary immigration laws by the same bunch of Jews who had lied us into the war. And so here we are.
You know, while I’m on the subject of immigration and the Jews, I should mention that the Jews are a little bashful about this. They realize that America’s open-border policy is increasingly unpopular with White Americans, and they don’t want to be blamed for its consequences. And yet it is a Jewish policy, and they remain solidly behind it, despite a few diversionary moves designed to throw us off the track, such as occasional well publicized expressions of concern by prominent Jews about the dangers of uncontrolled immigration. The fact is that the big media bosses are solidly behind increasing America’s so-called “diversity” through more non-White immigration, and the big media bosses are nearly all Jews. Mr. Clinton is solidly behind the continued darkening of America, and if Mr. Clinton supports a policy you can be sure it is Jewish, whether it is forcing the U.S. military to accept homosexuals or arguing for Federal laws against so-called “hate crimes” or keeping the borders open.
In this regard it is instructive to note that what the Jews are doing to the United States with non-White immigration, they also are doing to the countries which were our allies in the great war to save the Jews. Britain, for example, is fast becoming non-British. London is a multi-racial cesspool as bad as any city in America. And Prime Minister Tony Blair takes his orders from the same people that Bill Clinton does.
Australia, of course, was also one of our allies in the crusade to destroy Germany, and White Australians, like White Americans, have become alarmed about the efforts of the Jews and their collaborators to destroy the European character of the Australian population. One patriotic Australian woman, Pauline Hanson, has been especially effective in giving expression to the concerns of White Australians. She formed Australia’s new political party, called “One Nation,” and has done startlingly well in provincial elections. The Jews and their camp followers in Australia are frantic to stop her “keep Australia White” movement. So just last week Jews in Australia stole the membership list of One Nation and began publishing the names and addresses of Pauline Hanson’s supporters in the Australia/Israel Review, hoping to intimidate them into dropping out of the party. Two thousand names were published last week, with the threat that the remainder of the party’s supporters will have their names published in future issues of Australia/Israel Review. The reason this threat is intimidating is that the mass media in Australia, just as in the United States, are utterly hostile to anyone not in accord with Jewish policy. One good aspect of the affair, however, is that it has caused an unexpectedly strong backlash in Australia against the Jews.
Anyway, it all hangs together: the increasingly favored status of homosexuals, the White slave trade, and the Jewish campaign to darken the White world everywhere: in Europe, in America, and in Australia. And it all came directly out of our great victory in the Second World War.
* * *
Source: American Dissident Voices, July 18, 1998